Skip to content
aiqbench takeMachine Learning

aiqbench analysis

TabReliBench introduces a critical evaluation framework for tabular foundation models (TFMs), revealing that high predictive accuracy does not guarantee reliable posterior predictive distributions or valid conditional coverage. The study demonstrates that standard metrics like marginal calibration can be misleading, as subgroup gaps often persist despite ensembling or conformal post-processing adjustments. This work is essential for practitioners seeking robust model selection strategies beyond simple aggregate rankings in tabular data contexts.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

TabReliBench: Evaluating Tabular Foundation Models Beyond Predictive Accuracy

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2610.13654v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Tabular foundation models (TFMs) are increasingly popular for their strong predictive performance. Many also provide posterior predictive distributions (PPDs), whose reliability remains less studied. We assess reliability through point prediction, distributional quality, marginal and subgroup calibration, and interval efficiency. We then introduce TabReliBench, a large classification and regression benchmark for these comparisons and dataset-level analyses. We find that TFMs' rankings change between TabArena and our benchmark and across reliability metrics. Regression TFMs usually achieve near-nominal marginal coverage and retain narrow intervals, but this favorable marginal behavior does not imply valid conditional coverage. Dataset-level analyses show that classification difficulty often accompanies poor calibration, whereas regression predictive performance is not a reliable indicator of calibration. Ensembling improves predictive performance but does not consistently improve calibration of PPDs; TFMs also benefit little from conformal post-processing, which does not reliably resolve subgroup gaps. Reliable TFM selection therefore requires multidimensional evaluation beyond aggregate rankings. Code is available at https://github.com/Tianqi-Zhao/TabReliBench.

Abstract:Tabular foundation models (TFMs) are increasingly popular for their strong predictive performance. Many also provide posterior predictive distributions (PPDs), whose reliability remains less studied. We assess reliability through point prediction, distributional quality, marginal and subgroup calibration, and interval efficiency. We then introduce TabReliBench, a large classification and regression benchmark for these comparisons and dataset-level analyses. We find that TFMs' rankings change between TabArena and our benchmark and across reliability metrics. Regression TFMs usually achieve near-nominal marginal coverage and retain narrow intervals, but this favorable marginal behavior does not imply valid conditional coverage. Dataset-level analyses show that classification difficulty often accompanies poor calibration, whereas regression predictive performance is not a reliable indicator of calibration. Ensembling improves predictive performance but does not consistently improve calibration of PPDs; TFMs also benefit little from conformal post-processing, which does not reliably resolve subgroup gaps. Reliable TFM selection therefore requires multidimensional evaluation beyond aggregate rankings. Code is available at this https URL.

53 pages, including supplementary materials. Code: this https URL

Machine Learning (cs.LG)

arXiv:2610.13654 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2610.13654v1 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.13654 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 259 words

Related coverage